When will people learn that criminals don't follow the law?

Family of mall shooting victim wants changes to gun laws

KATU: The family of the man who was killed in the shooting at Clackamas Town Center last year wants to see changes in gun laws both in Oregon and nationwide.
Steve Forsyth’s wife and kids are in counseling. They can’t sleep at night, but the family recognizes the value of sharing their story and how it may help shape the way people look at gun violence. About the only solace Forsyth’s family took in how he died was that he didn’t suffer.
“He was talking to his dad when he was shot,” said Paul Kemp on Monday, who was Forsyth’s brother-in-law. “Steve dropped the phone, of course. He was dead before he hit the floor.”
Since the shooting, Kemp has reached out to national groups trying to curb gun violence and asking how he can help. Kemp is not a bleeding-heart liberal. “I’m a registered Republican and a gun owner,” he said. “But I secure my weapons, and I’m not going to give them up.
But Kemp does believe in a national background check when someone’s buying a gun. He believes there’s no need for citizens to be able to buy high-capacity magazines.He also thinks there ought to be consequences for gun owners who don’t properly store their weapons.
Jacob Tyler Roberts, the young man who shot and killed Forsyth, Cindy Yuille and seriously wounded 15-year-old Kristina Shevchenko before fatally shooting himself Dec. 11, 2012, would have passed a background check. But he’d stolen the gun he used that day (from an acquaintance), and investigators have told Kemp the shooter had with him 145 rounds of ammunition.
“The absolute worst day of my life – the worst event – was having to tell Alex his dad was dead, was shot at the mall,” Kemp said. “There’s no good way to do that, and I cannot fathom what those parents in Newtown went through. … It’s not worth it and it should not happen to more families.” Alex is 14 years old and he and his father share a birthday. Kemp plans to be in Salem later this week, talking to state lawmakers about changing gun laws in Oregon.
Four proposed gun-control measures go before the Oregon Senate Judiciary Committee on Friday. Senate Bill 347would ban guns in primary and secondary schools. Senate Bill 699would prohibit openly carrying a weapon in public buildings, including the state Capitol. Another, Senate Bill 700requires background checks on gun sales and transfers, except between family members, and Senate Bill 796 requires a shooting test to obtain a concealed-handgun license.
Gun rights supporters say the bills would only punish gun owners who obey the law and make it tougher for them to protect themselves and the people around them.
While I feel badly for the victims and their families, none of these bills proposed would have done a thing to prevent this mall shooting.
How exactly does Kemp want to define “properly store” your weapon? Many people store their firearms in a safe, yet there’s no guarantee a thief won’t make off with your safe/crack it open to steal guns. Firearm owners without children in their homes don’t necessarily feel the need to buy a safe. And there are many firearm owners that keep a weapon by their bed, out on a night stand, so they have easy access to them in case of an emergency.
And he feels there’s no need for citizens to be able to buy high-capacity magazines? Hate to tell him this but his feelings infringe on my Second Amendment right.
What this article fails to mention is that an individual, carrying a firearm, may have prevented more people being killed at this mall. During the shooting, Nick Meli, a concealed carry permit holder, drew his Glock 22, and took aim at Roberts but did not fire since there was an innocent person behind Roberts. Meli asserts that Roberts saw him, and that this may have contributed to Roberts’ decision to commit suicide.
I’m all for keeping guns out of criminals’ hands, yet it’s been proven time and time again that strict gun control laws don’t work (just look at Chicago, DC, New York, etc.) and that gun free zones are a target rich environment for criminals. It’s the criminals that need tougher consequences for their actions, not law-abiding citizens.
DCG

Leave a Reply

This comment form is under antispam protection

This comment form is under antispam protection

Subscribe

Notify of

Guest

Vic Bailey

You CAN’T GET RID OF THE CRIMINALS BY LOCKING UP LAW ABIDING CITIZENS! LOCK UP THE CRIMINALS AND DON’T LET THEM OUT! And a lot of them are Politicians, Cops, Judges and Lawyers, not counting what a Criminal the president happens to be! Semper Fi.

Vote Up0Vote Down Reply

6 years ago

Guest

Dennis H Bennett

An avowed life-long Democrat (octogenarian) radio commentator tried this slick sleight of hand two days ago in Charlotte: “They always say don;t take guns away from law abiding citizens, but the shooting at (insert your own scene) was done by a pharmacist who WAS a law-abiding citizen…” The twist avoids intent, mental imbalance, acceptable violence and personal responsibility. ALL criminals were at one time or another law-abiding, but crossed the line into criminal status through their choice. Sheep bots and Chicago’s southside will never be able to see this.

A few years back, Richmond VA transfered ALL illegal gun possession cases to Federal court. (a felon with a gun, illegally concealed gun, underage gun pocession, a stolen gun, etc) A conviction brought a MINIMUM SENTANCE of 5 Years in FEDERAL Lockup. Pretty soon the local thugs and gang bangers were either locked up of self disarmed. Either way the Crime rate pulmeted.
That’s the kind of gun control laws we need.